× Members

PIP tricky issue

More
6 years 9 months ago #191270 by DRAGON2009
PIP tricky issue was created by DRAGON2009
Hello
I am thinking about making a mandatory reconsideration request as I feel I was under pointed on my PIP decision and was one point short of enhanced rate care and was under pointed for mobility and missed out on the mobility . The issue as regards the mobility is that I was pointed for 'prompting' whereas my issue historically is inability through severe anxiety /panic to cope with unfamiliar journeys alone. My understanding is that decision earliuer this year ( of the UT ) was favourable and I might well have qaulified for LR mobiluty with this alone but then the Govt changed the regs so that I wold ( I think ) get only 4 points for this need ? However my claim was made before the regulation change. Whilst of course \I would have to satisfy the MR that my need was beyond prompting will they not in any event dig their heels in and rely on the new regulation ? My other hope of getting the mobility is to get my walking issue 4 points whereas they gave me none on the basis I could sqaut and walk 30 metres at the assessment and am on no medication. I rather feel that was not a good justification for refusing the 4 points ?

The other concern I have is whether a decision maker (if they think the report flawed) could just insist on a fresh examination ?

I wonder what you make of this ?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 years 9 months ago #191292 by Gordon
Replied by Gordon on topic PIP tricky issue
XFACTOR

The change to the Descriptors was enacted on 16 March and can't apply to any Decision made before this but there was no statement as to how it applied to claims started before the 16th which has been included in previous changes like this, for example ESA.

The DWP have applied the new Descriptors to all Decisions made on or after the 16th, their argument is that guidance which they operated to, has not in fact changed and that the change to the Descriptors was simply to go back to that guidance.

As to the Going Out activity, changed or not. It covers three tasks; planning a route, undertaking a journey and following a route. Ignoring the planning aspect, the two remaining tasks are seen as being mutually exclusive of each other, although I would not quote the link, this was the same in DLA.

Basically, a claimant who never leaves the house cannot be considered in regard to the ability to follow a route, and a claimant who has problems following a route must by definition be able to leave the house. So you need to pick your battle, as trying to argue both could easily result in not scoring any points at all.

So are you aiming for the 10 points of Descriptor (e), that you cannot go out at all, or do you want to argue for (d) or (f) (10 and 12 points respectively), that you cannot follow a route, understanding that this is primarily an issue of navigation and that your reasons for being unable to complete the task must be related to this.

Whilst a DM can require a new assessment, I can't remember hearing of this ever happening.

Gordon

Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: GordonGaryBISCatherineWendyKellygreekqueenpeterKatherineSuper UserjimmckChris
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.